11 July 2012 11:17 PM

The Synod's shame

Decent Christians are extremely upset, and rightly so, about the resolution passed at the General Synod a few days ago endorsing the Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine and Israel. The EAPPI aims to bring ‘internationals to the West Bank to experience life under occupation’. Its mission is to ‘accompany Palestinians and Israelis in their non-violent actions and to carry out concerted advocacy efforts to end the occupation’, and it has called on supporters to stage sit-ins at Israeli Embassies, to hack government websites in order to promote its message and of course promote the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against Israel.

The EAPPI is a one-sided organisation which presents Israel entirely falsely as the regional aggressor and the Palestinians as its victims, whereas the opposite is the case. Last year a senior Fatah official, Abbas Zaki, declared that if Israel left the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria this would mean the end of Israel altogether -- the Palestinians’ true goal which they had to keep quiet. And he was by no means the first Palestinian to say this.

But the EAPPI makes no acknowledgement that the sole reason for the ‘occupation’ is the refusal by the Palestinians to accept the right of Israel to be a Jewish state, and their resulting endless attempts to wage a war of annihilation against it by murdering Israeli citizens. Instead it casts Israel as the villain of the piece. In other words, the EAPPI promotes the demonisation and delegitimisation of Israel, the inversion of truth and justice and the double victimisation of the targets of mass murder.

‘...nothing but an insidious front for a pro-Palestinian campaign to propagate the partisan lie that, while Israel is besieged by child killers, infiltrated by suicide bombers, surrounded by Islamist propagandists and endures almost daily missiles launched at civilian areas, she is the aggressor, the terroriser, the occupying force.’

‘... the EAPPI ascribes Palestinian misery to apartheid Israel alone, consistently turning a blind eye to Palestinian aggression, corruption, rejectionism and incitement (not to mention Islamism, homophobia, racism and the oppression of women). The EAPPI is blind to antisemitism and deaf to the numerous overtures to peace which have been offered. They are ignorant of Israel’s need for security, and oblivious to the fact that she alone in the entire region is a vibrant, tolerant, multiracial, multi-faith society.’

It is simply astounding that, with Christians being persecuted by Muslims across the Third World, not least in Gaza and the disputed territories, being converted at knifepoint, driven from their homes and even burned in their churches in Africa and elsewhere, the Church of England remains silent about all this but instead singles out Israel for condemnation – Israel, the one country in the Middle East where Christians are protected, thriving and increasing.

Rub your eyes indeed. But then, the obsessive hatred of Israel, on routine display in the Church of England as elsewhere, has nothing whatever to do with evidence or reason. It has everything to do with bigotry. And in the case of the church, as became all too plain at that Synod meeting, with overt anti-Jewish bigotry. For as the Times of Israel reported, some of the clerics blamed the fact they had voted for the EAPPI upon the ’Jewish lobby’.

‘“A few people said that all the lobbying from the Jewish side led us to vote the other way,” said the Rt. Revd. Nigel McCulloch, who is chair of the Council of Christians and Jews (CCJ), the UK’s oldest Jewish-Christian interfaith group. “There was over-lobbying by some members of the Jewish community. The CCJ actually warned against this, as we know how the Synod works and it’s not a good way to get things done.”’

So not only did the Synod effectively vote to punish the Jews for their own victimisation, but these unnamed clerics are now blaming the Jews for having made them do so!

McCulloch denied that the reference to the ‘Jewish lobby’ was in any way anti-Jew. But why did these clerics single out the Jewish lobby for blame, whereas the apparently equally vigorous Palestinian lobby escaped similar censure? And even if this perceived Jewish ‘over-lobbying’ did get up their noses, why should this have caused them to vote in a way they otherwise would not have done – other than out of spite?

In fact, what was said at the Synod appears to have been even worse than this. For in a statement after the vote, the President of the Jewish Board of Deputies Vivien Wineman said:

‘To hear the debate at Synod littered with references to ‘powerful lobbies’, the money expended by the Jewish community, ‘Jewish sounding names’ and the actions of the community ‘bringing shame on the memory of victims of the Holocaust’, is deeply offensive and raises serious questions about the motivation of those behind this motion.’

It is not surprising that the church’s hatred of Israel should spill over into overt anti-Jewish bigotry. For this vote hardly came out of the blue. For years now, the Church of England has been playing with anti-Jewish theological fire. Its close links with radical Palestinian Christians have kick-started the ancient and previously wholly discredited Christian calumny of ‘replacement theology’, which holds that by rejecting Jesus the Jews forfeited the love of God who as a result transferred to the Christians all the promises he had previously made to the Jews.

This obnoxious doctrine was behind much Christian persecution of the Jews through the centuries, and was only pushed underground with the Holocaust. But with radical Palestinian Christians fusing this ancient calumny with their own lies about the Jews of Israel having pushed them out and the Palestinians’ need to replace them, replacement theology is disgracefully once again mainstream in the church.

So who can be surprised that the Synod has descended into the Israel-hating, Jew-hating sewer?

Share this article:

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

During the last thousand years, there were just too many people calling themselves "decent Christians", doing what Melanie Phillips accused today's Muslims on doing, persecuting people who believed in anything else. It might be the time to be a "decent human".

Sadly the perception is that the main stream `Christianity` groups really do represent the will and voice of the Almighty God and his son Jesus Christ. Nothing can be farther from the truth! When was the last time anyone saw a bible used as a reply or advice in any `Christian` forum?These people are so far away from the teachings of Christ and the laws of Almighty God that they have, in reallity made themselves in opposition to the very God they say they represent. In a nutshell these people have had their days numbered and because they have become part of the Satanic system that rules the world at this time they will find the same destination in a short time, everlasting destrucction and having no place in a new system which Almighty God has planned for the meekest of mankind.

The problem with much of this is the way people glibly refer (as with many commenters, here) to "the Palestinians". But who are these, exactly? Well, I'm no expert, but, there is surely a difference between Palestinian Christians and Palestinian Muslims; and among Muslims there is surely a distinction between "ordinary" people - who probably, like most people anywhere, just want to get on with their lives in peace - and those engaged in jihad (terrorism); and then, the terrorist group (of several) which they belong to, and its external sponsor (Iran I fancy, in most cases). So, which sort of "Palestinian" is it that the C of E should recognise and support? Which group do most white Western middle-class "liberals" (WWMCL) support? Which might Israel/Jewish people consider worthy of recognition/support/condemnation, etc.? It's very complex, I'll be bound ... but most WWMCL just bleat about "the Palestinians".

It is surely right to condemn any anti-semitism. Israel does indeed lobby hard in the UK, as in the US and elsewhere. Its lobbying is highly effective. To say that it is a Jewish lobby is, I think you are right, at the very least an unpleasant echo of what anti-semites say. There are plenty of non-Jews lobby for Israel. Tthere is no reason why Jews should not. There are Jews who support the Palestinian cause, just as there are non-Jews. The question of Israel and Palestine is distinct from religion. You are wrong to blur the two as anti-semites do. Your slur on the Synod of the Church of England harms your case. Surely you can see this. To blur anti-semitism with criticism of Israel, and to make grotesque accusations of anti-semitism against the Synod, detracts from the point you should make as forcefully as possible - that anti-semitism is intolerable.

Area C of the West Bank - what Israel and its faithful apolgists call "disputed" - is being rendered Palestinian-free - gradually, below the worold's boredom threshold. When there are few enough to accommodate within Israel without risk of a "demographic timebomb" (too many people of the Wrong Sort), Israel will annexe the territories. The rest of the Palestinians will be confined to 10% of Palestine and the prison in Gaza. The likes of Abbas, financed by the EU and US, will do Israel's dirty work of keeping them from disturbing Israel's peace. Problem solved. Land grab complete. Shrieking about Iran distracts attention. So does such as this article.

Yes, as a cradle Anglican, I'm utterly appalled that the C of E has descended into this nastiness, which is quite against Christian, English, or Western traditions of justice and fairness, and also against defence of what is right and true. Condemnation of the BNP (with its obvious implication that membership of other political parties (ie. left-wing ones) is OK) is a very similar incident. "John" (here, 7/15/2012 11.59), and the C of E Synod, take note: all the most evil things in recent times have been done by explicitly Left-wing regimes/despots, the Left-wing claim to be morally superior is totally and utterly groundless.

I gave up reading this column after the first 2 words - 'Decent christians'. Can there be any other kind? Invariably in this publication, 'decent christians' means intolerant people with extreme right-wing views who call themselves 'christian' but often fail to follow what Christ preached. Of course I may be wrong in this case, as you lost me after those 2 words.

Melanie Phillips states the exact opposite of the truth on the Israel/Palestine conflict as usual. We are talking about the Occupied Palestinian Territories not "the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria". This is international law as most recently confirmed by 15 votes to nil at the International Court of Justice in their advisory opinion on the Wall illegally built by the Israelis on Palestinian land.

The two state settlement based on the 1967 borders is supported by the Palestianians and all the Arab States, and is voted on every year at the United Nations, opposed only by Israel supported by the United States. The conflict is not difficult to end but requires the reciprocal recognition of the Palestinian right to national self determination.

It is people like Melanie Phillips who refuse to even acknowledge the existence of the Palestinians who are an obstacle to peace in the region. I am glad the Synod ignored the dishonest campaign against EAPPI.

I heard the muslim prayer here in my central London flat on Monday morning about 4:30am, is it Ramadan yet? someone was saying loud microphone it sounded like "Akbara Akbar", thanks a lot for disturbing my sleep,

Perhaps the Church figures that if they bash the Jews, the Arabs will be grateful and less likely to persecute Christians living in Arab countries.

One day these idiot clerics will realize they are supping with the devil, and when Christians are being ethnically cleansed from the Middle East, the Church's cries for help from Israel will fall on deaf ears.

Bob Dylan, the Bard of Hibbing, Minnesota, wrote and recorded a song about this state of affairs in 1983, called "Neighborhood Bully"

Well, he’s surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn’t hurt a fly. To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall asleep
He’s the neighborhood bully

"So who can be surprised that the Synod has descended into the Israel-hating, Jew-hating sewer?" Surely not an average Brit for whom the Church has long ceased to be of any interest. One of the reasons for this is that nowadays it hardly represents any religious faith at all. To be "with it" and hip and trendy and Israel-bashing one has many other, jollier options! You can't compare for fun a Hamas demo in open air with varied clothing and colours and masks and the whole "death to Israel" spectacle with the same message in a gloomy empty temple.

Frank Bright, It is surprising anyone is willing to believe in a God who parcels out land to a select few and tells them to kill the existing inhabitants in order to take possession. It is surprising to believe it on the basis of texts written by those select few. It is surprising anyone thinks what the bible says about such territorial disputes three thousand years ago has any relevance to who lives where and who has a right to evict whom (and kill them if they resist) now.

I have no problem with the right of Israel to exist but I do have a problem with "the right of Israel to be a Jewish state".

I also have a problem with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the established Church in this country, the role of the Catholic church in any number of other countries etc..

Your later quote about Israel being a "tolerant.....multi-faith" society is broadly accurate (although you should not ignore the recent incidents of racism directed against immigrants and the implication that the Arab minority is accorded full equality is a sick joke) but it contradicts your support and approval of Israel as a 'Jewish' state.

In this country the privileges given the Church of England mean that although we are a multi-faith society - and we have people of no faith and they exist in Israel too - we are not a fully equal society, some are, in varying degrees, disadvantaged by the faith they hold (let alone other factors).

As far as I know the promise by God to the Land of Israel was made to Abraham and not to a Palestinian, see Genesis 12:2-3 and 13:14-17, but then I've only got the King James edition which is probably out of date and has since been re-written, re-interpreted, re-invented giving it a tendentious make-over by the C of E's Synod ever ready to cast stones and yet not considering the beam that is in their collective eyes

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the moderator has approved them. They must not exceed 500 words. Web links cannot be accepted, and may mean your whole comment is not published.